The philosophies of men mingled with the philosophies of women.

30 Years of Lessons: Women and Gays in the CoC

We are very pleased to have our first guest post from Rich Brown. Rich was an editor at the then-RLDS Church’s publishing division (Herald Publishing House) for 14 years before the operation was merged into International Headquarters across town in Independence, Missouri. He has also served a book and magazine editor there for nine years, the last three as managing editor of the Herald, the church’s monthly magazine (somewhat comparable to the Ensign). Five years ago he accepted early retirement, leading to the publication of his first book, “What Was Paul Thinking?” (Isaac’s Press). He’s currently working on a second: “Christians in Exile: What We Can Learn from the Hebrew Prophets about Becoming a Prophetic People” (to be released later this year). He writes a weekly blog based on the Revised Common Lectionary (http://richbrownforewords.wordpress.com) and occasionally blog at saintsherald.com.

Thirty years to the week after approving priesthood ordination for women, the Community of Christ is extending the sacraments of ordination and marriage to gays and lesbians in the United States. A two-year interim period begins on Monday, March 31, after which it will be reviewed and considered for permanent status. This follows similar action resulting from national conferences in Australia and Canada.

Lessons learned from what turned out to be a tumultuous (many might say disastrous) beginning for the 1984 landmark event have been put into place by CofC leaders today. Although a few church members in recent months have either turned in their priesthood cards or left the church, it’s nothing like the major exodus that took place three decades ago.

For starters, this time there was a three-year preparation period leading up to a special USA National Conference held right after World Conference in Independence, Missouri, last April. The 2,000 USA delegates spent several days listening, testifying, and worshiping together before overwhelmingly recommending that the First Presidency and the USA Team of Apostles issue the changes. The official conference report is here.

Here’s the specifics: The marriage sacrament is authorized for individuals in a same-gender relationship wherever such civil marriage is legal. Elsewhere CofC congregations may celebrate a special covenant/blessing worship experience. And ordination can be extended to individuals with same-gender orientation who are either in a committed, long-term relationship or who are celibate. For those wondering, the same rules apply to straight folks.

Thirty years ago World Conference delegates were caught off guard when RLDS President Wallace B. Smith presented an inspired document to priesthood quorums and orders on April 3. Two days later the document was approved by the conference as a whole and it became Section 156 of the Doctrine and Covenants. The document was mostly about a proposed temple to be built in Independence. But the last few paragraphs brought general counsel regarding priesthood, including the following:

I have heard the prayers of many, including my servant the prophet, as they have sought to know my will in regard to the question of who shall be called to share the burdens and responsibilities of priesthood in my church. I say to you now, as I have said in the past, that all are called according to the gifts which have been given them. This applies to priesthood as well as to any other aspects of the work. Therefore, do not wonder that some women of the church are being called to priesthood responsibilities. (Doctrine and Covenants 156:9)

“Wonder” wasn’t exactly the operative word for traditionalists and conservatives. Already suspicious of what they viewed as dangerous liberalizing tendencies in the church for at least two decades, they were incensed and vowed to fight the move every way possible. Business meetings in congregations, districts, and stakes where priesthood calls for women were presented often turned into angry shouting matches. People made sure every one of their baptized children was on hand to vote yes or no depending on the parents’ direction. My own stake (Blue Valley, which included a portion of Independence and eastern Jackson County) had its rules of operation suspended because people simply couldn’t get along. It was a sad, ugly, and unfortunate time even while marking a new era of broadened ministry in the church. Today women and men serve alongside one another. If you didn’t know what happened decades ago, you’d probably never suspect there was anything unusual about the way priesthood functions now.

Numerous resolutions on same-gender issues were submitted to the past few World Conferences but were ruled out of order by the First Presidency, mainly because they were considered important to church members in a select few nations rather than as something critical for the international church. The CofC has an official presence in more than 60 nations. In 2010 inspired counsel to the church called for creation of national conferences, specifically to consider issues related to same-gender orientation. With somewhere around half of all CofC members living outside the Western, industrialized countries in North America, Australia, and Europe, this was believed to be the only way same-gender issues could be dealt with in the church.

Delegates at the USA National Conference engaged in a unique process aimed at reaching “common consent.” This meant that a significant majority (at least 66 percent) would have to make a recommendation for top church leaders to act.

In mid-March of this year, the five apostles responsible for USA mission centers sent a copy of President Stephen Veazey’s “Statement to the Church: National Conference Recommendations and Interim Policies” to priesthood members. It was mailed to all USA pastors and high priests, evangelists (referred to as patriarchs before women were ordained), bishops, and seventy. They presented the president’s statement as “inspired by the Holy Spirit.” A DVD titled “President’s Reflections” will be available in April to church members and include four sections: Let Me Be Clear, What Does the Lord Require of Us, My Personal Testimony, and Room for Everyone.

President Veazey’s statement, which spills over onto a fourth page, is essentially a point-by-point counter to criticisms of the new same-gender policies.

To those who argued that these new policies were in opposition to previous revelation given to the church, President Veazey had this to say:

Doctrine and Covenants 111 provides instruction regarding marriage in the church. It is a statement written in the mid-1830s to counter rumors about adultery and polygamy in the church. Same-gender marriage was not conceivable, much less a question, in early 19th-century thought. To conclude that Doctrine and Covenants 111 definitely resolves the question of same-gender marriage ignores its historical context and stated purpose. Also, although Section 111 was included in the Doctrine and Covenants, its historical preface clearly states it was not a revelation.

To those who have pointed to certain Bible verses used to condemn same-gender orientation and relationships, he offered this:

Let me be clear. Continuing Revelation approved by the World Conference means those particular Bible verses are not the final word on these matters. Such verses now are understood through insights offered in Continuing Revelation approved by the church…. However, the real issue was not just several Bible verses, but how we understand and apply scripture.

He identified Doctrine and Covenants Section 163 as important counsel in these matters:

Scripture is an indispensable witness to the Eternal Source of light and truth, which cannot be fully contained in any finite vessel or language…. Scripture has been written and shaped by human authors through experiences of revelation and ongoing inspiration of the Holy Spirit in the midst of time and culture. Scripture is not to be worshiped or idolized…. It is not pleasing to God when any passage of scripture is used to diminish or oppress races, genders, or classes of human beings. Much physical and emotional violence has been done to some of God’s beloved children through the misuse of scripture. The church is called to confess and repent of such attitudes and practices. –D. and C. 163:7 (excerpted)

President Veazey concluded that Section 163:7

applies to the verses used to deny persons of same-gender orientation access to all sacraments. It also applies to situations where scripture verses are used by some to dominate, oppress, or exclude others who are different from them. Because the World Conference approved Section 163:7 as an expression of God’s will, the Bible verses most often used to categorically denounce same-gender orientation and relationships no longer should be presented as the final word on these matters.

He said it “is clear that God is maturing us as a `prophetic people’ who discern divine will by responsibly engaging scripture, tradition, Continuing Revelation, knowledge and reason, personal and community experience, and Spirit-led consent…. I believe more-than-sufficient revelation has been received to resolve issues about same-gender relationships in nations where those issues are pressing matters.”

Near the end of his official statement, President Veazey wrote: “As I have continued to seek direction on behalf of the church, the Spirit has brought assurance that questions about same-gender orientation and marriage are primarily related to life on Earth. They do not have necessary bearing on salvation, the divinity of the church and the sacraments, or the ultimate fulfillment of God’s purposes.”

No doubt people both inside the CofC and outside it will be examining these words and trying to read between the lines. For me, it’s clear that “Continuing Revelation” is the most important consideration for the church as it deals with these and other critical issues.

It reminds me of an essay by theologian David Ford who described religion as God speaking to us from the past. Think of that as the accumulation of scripture, church tradition, and wise people who’ve used reason and intelligence to bring the church to where it is today. Ford identified revelation as God speaking to us from the future.

If God is free to open history from the future then the future need not mirror the past. In the Church this combines with the message of the cross to allow for discontinuities and innovations. –David F. Ford, `Faith in the Cities: Corinth and the Modern City’ in “On Being the Church” (1989)

Ford cited the example of the apostle Paul who claimed authority as an apostle through direct revelation from the risen Christ rather than an institutional authority handed on to him from Peter and the other apostles in Jerusalem. To that I would add the experience of Joseph Smith Jr. in the early 19th century, who served as God’s instrument in bringing forth a “great and marvelous” new work.

We are all caught somewhere in between religion and revelation, and every church/denomination finds its own point on the continuum. With this “Statement to the Church” President Stephen Veazey is not only prompting the Community of Christ in an obvious direction but in a curious way he mirrors the examples of Apostle Paul and Joseph Smith in challenging the church to understand more fully what it means to be a prophetic people.

Share this:

Like this:

Related

Published by Rich Brown

Rich Brown is a writer and editor, husband and father, minister and semi-voracious reader, gardener and novice fly fisherman, American and Canadian citizen, living in the southeastern corner of the Kansas City suburbs.
View all posts by Rich Brown

17 thoughts on “30 Years of Lessons: Women and Gays in the CoC”

Thank you for posting this it offers perspective to what we are currently working through.

I’ve often wondered about the synergy and peace that could be found in a merger between LDS and CoC. CoC would benefit from the LDS infrastructure of a large number of meetinghouses throughout the world and LDS might benefit by remaining traditionally orthodox while offering a liberal alternative. Services of both flavors could be held each Sunday in each meetinghouse. To end questions competition and arguments regarding lines of authority the leaders could cross-ordain each other and baptism in one could be recognized in the other. End of contention, take your pick. Split families could choose to alternate flavors of attend at separate times. Does CoC like green Jello?

‘s very interesting to contemplate just how divisive the female ordination change was. Clearly things have changed a lot since 1984. From Working Girl and 9 to 5 we’ve gotten to a point where female business people are the norm. Doctors and lawyers, politicians, etc. Maybe less within Mormonism, but we all live and work in the real world. What was shocking in 1984 is not in 2014.

We recently looked at an office that shared a building with the Restoration church causing me to read up on this split. Fascinating stuff. Notable that most of the things that divide members are political differences: for some the CoC was too liberal. For many of us, the LDS Church sometimes feels like a tea party rally.

I really appreciated this post, a few years ago we visited Independence and the CoC properties there. It was very interesting — I remember being so shocked to see female and male apostles in their portraits on the wall and not knowing what to think; and also of appreciating the amount of Emma/Joseph items they have on display for everyone. It was a great experience and enjoyed learning more about CoC here. Thank you!

Having met some restorationists in Independence a number of years ago, it was clear that the women ordination thing was a last straw rather than an opening one. They were very bitter with the idea that their Church (the RLDS) was taken over by a group of very liberal and protestantizing group of leaders. From practice to theology to lessons, the Church underwent some big changes. And frankly, they couldn’t deal with it.

The LDS Church has also seen its share of movement out of the Church when major inflection points occur ( stopping polygamy, Priesthood to all worthy males, begin two example) or when change has not suited some as coming fast enough or to their liking. (like now)

Very interesting post and a very different way of handling “continuing revelation.” Seems to me LDS leaders might learn something from it.

Jeff, you’re quite correct that women’s ordination was the last straw or tipping point for traditionalists in the RLDS Church. There was a whole range of issues and circumstances that had an impact on the transformation of the church. Beginning around 1960 RLDS missionaries in Asia were confronted with questions of religious identity as never before. We had usually defined ourselves in opposition to Utah LDS, and nobody in Asia knew about that much less cared. The question there was: Who are we as Christians and what is our message to the vast non-Christian population. Combine that with growing questions about early Restoration history (particularly Joseph’s involvement in polygamy and what we often refer to as his “theological speculations” that resulted in temple practices, the Book of Mormon as literal ancient history, the “One True Church” mentality, exclusive priesthood authority, biblical scholarship–well, the list is a long one.

Today we’re fond of saying what matters most is the mission of Jesus Christ. That’s a long way from what mattered most 50 years ago, I think.

And so 50 years from now the current resolutions/guidelines of the CoC could be discarded for a “newer” mission statement?

What bothered me (and others) was that leaders in the CoC were baptizing/ordaining people who were openly practicing homosexuals without any regard to the church’s restrictions; a blatant act of defiance. They didn’t get in trouble for doing it, either, unlike those who jumped the gun on women priesthood.

“Today we’re fond of saying what matters most is the mission of Jesus Christ.”

I think this is so important and yet, for many members, especially those who are troubled by Church history and other things, they tend to lose sight of this important message about what the gospel is really all about. the organization is merely the earthly imperfect vehicle to bring the message of Jesus to the people.

“Today we’re fond of saying what matters most is the mission of Jesus Christ.” I hear this a lot in the face of disagreements, both within and between denominations. I know repeating it is supposed to remind us of what we have in common, but it’s a complete cop-out. What is the mission of Christ? To save us from our sins? Okay, maybe that’s a pretty commonly held belief, but we don’t agree on how it works (baptism? repentance?) or what things constitute sin, or a whole lot of other highly relevant things. Without context, the meaning and point of “saving us from our sins” is pretty empty, and we certainly don’t agree on the context.

Jesus came into the world to proclaim the kingdom of God on Earth (as it is in heaven). After his death and resurrection the church was challenged to be the “body of “Christ” commissioned to go into all the world and make disciples in the name of Jesus Christ who, by the power of the Holy Spirit, will seek to establish that kingdom (or, peaceable reign of Christ, if you prefer that language) in triumph over the power of Sin/Evil in the world. That’s the “good news” (gospel). Notice that there’s nothing in that about “saving us from our sins.”

Rich’s post is very interesting and I am glad to have read it; I’ve always been interested in the history and progress of Restoration groups of various types and their similarities and differences. He states in comment #9, Today we’re fond of saying what matters most is the mission of Jesus Christ. That’s a long way from what mattered most 50 years ago, I think.

I certainly agree that it’s different from what mattered 50 years ago, and I think none of us would disagree that “the mission of Jesus Christ” is what “matters most.” However, when that statement becomes a kind of least common denominator – an “all roads lead to Rome,” or “All You Need Is Love,” it ceases to be useful as Matin points out in #13. I think it’s helpful as a way of personally dealing with my differences with another individual, so that we can find our common ground and work together for a common goal, but as a functioning theology it lacks – well, theology.

It (“What matters most is the mission of Jesus Christ”) is not intended as a functioning theology or of any other kind of theology on its own, for that matter. It’s merely a starting point that grabs your attention.

The full mission statement of the Community of Christ is: We proclaim Jesus Christ and promote communities of joy, hope, love, and peace. Essentially, that’s a two-pronged statement about salvation–personal and social/global. Within that mission there are five goals or initiatives: (1) Invite people to Christ; (2) Develop disciples to serve; (3) Abolish poverty and end suffering; (4) Pursue peace on and for the earth; and (5) Experience congregations in mission. Key to success in all five areas is generosity of time, talent, and treasure.

Within the past few years the CofC has developed a list of nine Enduring Principles to guide us:

Grace and Generosity
Sacredness of Creation
Continuing Revelation
Worth of All Persons
All Are Called
Responsible Choices
Pursuit of Peace (Shalom)
Unity in Diversity
Blessings of Community

And so if you’re looking for a “functioning theology,” then probably all of the above qualifies. I know, there’s a lot there. But, among other things, it helps explain why we have such a tough time communicating with evangelicals who are only interested in the question, “Are you saved?” I sense that our LDS “cousins” probably have a tough time with that, too, albeit for somewhat different reasons.